ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2026
Evaluation of a novel communication workshop for healthcare professionals working with metastatic breast cancer patients.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNumerous reports criticise the communication between patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and their health care providers (HCPs). System constraints may contribute to HCP burnout and compassion-fatigue, adding further to patient dissatisfaction. We developed and evaluated a novel communication skills training workshop based on verbatim quotes from a survey of patients with MBC.
methodsPrior to attendance at 6-h small group, facilitator-led workshops, participants completed: - General Health Questionnaire (GHQ12), Standford Fulfilment Index (SFI) and the navigating professional boundaries (NPB) questionnaire. Self-confidence discussing 9 key MBC issues was assessed pre- and post-workshop.
resultsSixty-six HCPs (20 surgeons, 26 oncologists, and 20 nurses) participated. Overall, 14/66 (21.2%) had GHQ12 scores of ≥4 indicating heightened psychological concerns, 21/66 (31.8%) had burnout and merely (21/66 (31.8%) felt professionally fulfilled by work. Higher anxiety levels (GHQ-12 ≥ 4) were associated with increased odds of burnout (OR = 6.0, 95% CI: 1.7 to 21.0, p = 0.0057) and reduced odds of professional fulfilment (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.015 to 1.00, p = 0.052). The primary outcome of self-confidence communicating about 9 key issues improved significantly post-workshop (mean change = 1.5, 95%CI:1.14 to 1.81). Workshops were rated highly by all participants.
conclusionsBespoke small-group workshops using patient verbatims, and which addressed psychological and practice constraints inhibiting effective communication, significantly improved HCPs' self-confidence discussing challenging MBC consultations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.